02 January 2007

From tomorrow's Variety, Peter Bart comes out for California secession. His reasons?

California is too vital and free-thinking to be dragged down by the U.S. any longer. As you well know, Governor, all Texans want to do is declare war on obscure countries, and we haven't won one of those in 60 years. The evangelicals own the South, and California isn't ready for their social agenda. The mandarins of New York and Boston have lost their political muscle -- all they can bring to us is more Clintons and John Kerry.

A liberated California would be an instant global force, Governor, and would provide you with a messianic platform. Trade would soar, incomes would rise and the government could lavish its resources on infrastructure and education rather than foreign wars. Who needs Washington's pathetic "entitlements" when we could create our own?

There are risks, to be sure; the Bushies would threaten Civil War, but they don't have any soldiers left to fight one. Some smarmy Justice Dept. bureaucrat would cite Chapter 115 of Title 18 of the U.S. Code, which terms rebellion a criminal offense punishable by imprisonment, but South Carolina was getting away with its secession in 1861 until a few loser states like Mississippi and Alabama horned in on its act.

Besides, that was all about slavery, and we're talking higher precepts now. A sovereign California would be liberated from a profligate, warrior national government whose interests are inconsistent with those of California. As you know better than anyone, Governor, all California wants is to be rich and flakey. In what other part of the world could a Hollywood, a Burlingame and a Cucamonga peacefully co-exist?

What a wonderful liberal wonderland California would be if we weren't saddled with all that dead weight provided by the rest of the nation. Brilliant.

While over at the LA Times, Joel Stein does what Joel Stein often does, write poorly, and like an ass about how he doesn't care what you think.

Here's what my Internet-fearing editors have failed to understand: I don't want to talk to you; I want to talk at you. A column is not my attempt to engage in a conversation with you. I have more than enough people to converse with. And I don't listen to them either. That sound on the phone, Mom, is me typing.

Some newspapers even list the phone numbers of their reporters at the end of their articles. That's a smart use of their employees' time. Why not just save a step and have them set up a folding table at a senior citizen center with a sign asking for complaints?

I'm just guessing here, but I doubt any of his classes at Stanford included reading this book. Then there's this bit of patheticness, 'ha-ha', 'look at me', 'I'm having my people at the LA Times post this blog post for you losers to vent your loser spleens about my comic brilliance'. This comment, if real is far more disturbing than the stupid OpEd Joel Stein wrote

As a journalist I agree with Joel, our job is not to appreciate or reiterate the opinions of the undereducated American populous who thinks because they watch their local FOX affilliaite as they put on their Carhart shirt and Timberland boots every morning they are an expert. Our job is to tell you the story from our point of view, and your job is to know we are smarter than you, and we are right.

I don't know that 'Ryan Fishman' is really a journalist, but if he is, the attitude expressed is one of disdain for 'regular folks' and a desire to lead them to the conclusions he wants them to have rather than be an objective seeker of the truth.

I don't expect journalist to be free of bias in their personal life, but statements like those above make naked the desire and intent to report the facts only in a manner that supports a predetermined set of ideas.

For all I know that commenter is a right of center troll claiming to be a journalist, or a left of center commenter pretending to be an outrageously biased reporter to get the usual journalist haters to say outrageous things.

But there's plenty of evidence, anecdotal and otherwise, that there are lots of folks in lots of newsrooms that think like 'Ryan Fishman', even if they are smart enough not to ever talk like that in mixed company.

What? Now I have to spell things correctly as well? This blogging thing is getting to be too much work. Changed 'throws' in the title to the correct term 'throes'. I thank Mr. Cottage for pointing that out to me. I'll get around to the big playoff post tomorrow (and recap of the previous week).